Reference number: R12/0455
Site address: Land to the rear of 13 – 29 Crick Road, Rugby, CV21 4DU
Description: Erection of 8 detached dwellings and 2 double garages, accessed via existing access from Crick Road.
Case Officer Name & Number: Karen McCulloch, 01788 533623
This application is being reported to Committee at the request of Councillor Lawrence and was subject of a Committee site visit on 23rd May 2012.
Description of site
This application site is land which currently forms the gardens of properties on Crick Road and Browning Road.
Planning permission was granted in 2011 for the demolition of number 21 Crick Road and the erection of a total of 8 dwellings. This development has been carried out and some of the approved dwellings are nearing completion, one of these is currently occupied.
These dwellings are two storey, some with additional rooms in the roof space and are built of red brick with grey roof tiles.
There are a range of dwelling types and styles on Crick Road including two storey houses, bungalows and chalet bungalows. These include a mix of pitched and hipped roofs and a range of materials including brick, render and pebbledash.
Other recent developments have been completed or are under construction which create cul-de-sacs accessed from Crick Road, these include Wiggins Close opposite the site, land to the rear of 8-16 Crick Road and Orchard Gardens which is adjacent to the site, this includes the rear gardens of 31 and 33 Crick Road and the site of 35 which was removed.
Properties on Browning Road are semi-detached brick houses with hipped roofs.Part of the boundary between the site and properties on Browning Road is marked by a tall wall, around 4m high.
The rear gardens included within the site include a range of planting.
Description of proposals
This application is for the erection of 8 dwellings, utilising the access between numbers 19 and 23 which serves the existing development. One dwelling is proposed to the east of the exisiting development, to the rear of 29 Crick Road and seven dwellings are proposed to the west of the existing development, to the rear of numbers 13 – 19 Crick Road.
The proposed dwellings will be similar to those already constructed. These will have the appearance of two storey houses, although 5 of these will include second floor accommodation within the roof space. The dwelling proposed on plot 10 is a different design, this will have a render finish and will have a lower ridge line with gable features over the windows. Plots 14 and 15 are also proposed with rendered projections to add variety to the development. The house proposed on plot 3A will be L-shaped with a projection to the front with rooms over the garage. Six of the proposed dwellings would have 5 bedrooms, one would have four bedrooms and one would have six bedrooms.
The properties will have ridge heights between 7.8mand 8.6m. The properties will include gable features and canopies and will have curved headers and brick detailing to the front elevations.
Detached garages are proposed to plots 9, 10, 11 and 12, the other plots would have integral garages with driveways to the front. Two visitor spaces are also proposed as part of this application.
Relevant planning history
R06/1974/PLN Refused
Erection of 5 detached dwellings
R07/2057/OPSApproved
Outline application for the demolition of 13 Crick Road and the erection of 9 dwellings to the rear of 13-19 Crick Road
R08/1307/ARMApproved
Approval of reserved matters, erection of 9 dwellings to the rear of 13-19 Crick Road
R08/0180/OARefused and Appeal Dismissed
Outline application for the erection of 3 houses and 2 bungalows to the rear of 21-25 Crick Road
R08/0454/OA Refused
Outline application for the erection of 3 houses and 2 bungalows to the rear of 21-25 Crick Road
R09/0558/OAApproved
Outline application for the erection of 5 dwellings to the rear of 21-25 Crick Road
The 2006 and 2008 applications proposed a vehicular access between numbers 23 and 25 and the reason for refusal included the impact of this access on the adjacent properties. The 2009 application, which was approved, proposed the access through the adjacent approved development, to the rear of 13-19 Crick Road.
R10/2148Approved
Demolition of 21 Crick Road, erection of 7 detached dwellings, new access and associated works.
R11/1450Approved
Erection of 1 detached dwelling (rear of 19 Crick Road)
R12/0638Resolved to approve subject to amendment to s106 agreement
Variation of condition 2 of planning permission R10/2148 (Demolition of 21 Crick Road, erection of 7 detached dwellings, new access and associated works) to change housetype on plot 3 and omit garage for plot 3, reposition plot 4, make alterations to approved housetypes B, G, H & J and amend parking arrangements.
Technical consultation responses
WCC HighwaysNo objectionSubject to conditions & informatives
WCC EcologyNo objectionSubject to informatives
WCC ArchaeologyNo comment
Environmental HealthNo objectionSubject to condition
Severn TrentNo objectionSubject to condition
Tree OfficerNo objection
Fire ServiceNo objectionSubject to condition
RBC RefuseNo comments received
WCC PlanningNo comments received
Third party comments
Councillor LawrenceObjection
-Government is against back garden development;
-continued development is dramatically changing character of Crick Road;
-housing estates are being built either side of the road, there have been 3 developments with 43 houses on one side and 3 developments on the other side;
-this is creeping development, if the applications were submitted as one officers and the Committee would have realised the intrusive nature of the developments;
-volume of traffic is increasing and there are lengthy waits to access the main road;
-dispute traffic surveys and consider traffic calming is a priority;
-a child was knocked down on the crossing which highlights the issue;
-development would create a crossroads with Wiggins Close and extra traffic;
-dwellings overlook neighbouring properties;
-members should visit the site to see the accumulated impact on residents;
-should listen to the views and needs of local residents.
Councillor SewellObjection
-there have been 6 back garden developments in Crick Road, houses have also been replaced by larger dwellings;
-this results in 70 new houses resulting in 300-400 traffic movements per day;
-cumulative impact on traffic in the area, combined with DIRFT traffic;
-will be further traffic from masts site and DIRFT expansion;
-is difficult for residents to access the A428;
-drivers waiting to turn right have been rear ended, however these minor accidents are not reported or recorded;
-there have also been serious accidents and people knocked down on the crossing;
-development would increase traffic and add a further hazard by forming a cross roads;
-impact on privacy of neighbouring properties;
-Committee should visit the site and properties on Browning Road;
-this will lead to a development of 16 houses, 5 affordable dwellings should be provided but is not mentioned in application;
-housing needs should not outweigh needs of residents;
-Government has stated it is against back garden development.
Neighbours (10)Objection
-will ruin well conserved area;
-further loss of green land, there is little rural landscape remaining;
-development will be visible from Crick Road above existing properties and will be large and obtrusive;
-loss of privacy to properties on OrchardGardens, Browning Road and Crick Road both in homes and gardens;
-loss of light and outlook;
-noise, pollution and disturbance during development and when complete;
-construction leads to noise before 7:30 and at weekends;
-air pollution will affect residents health;
-increased traffic on Crick Road, combined with traffic from previous developments and the mast site;
-increased traffic risk to safety of local school children;
-lorries associated with the development have blocked Crick Road and prevented access to properties;
-road within the site should include a footpath for pedestrian safety;
-development is not needed as there have been other recent developments nearby and the mast site is proposed;
-does not consider existing hedge which contains ash trees, building close to these trees will harm them;
-trees are used by wildlife and are part of local landscape which has been affected by other developments;
-understand central Government have stopped back garden developments;
-permission should not have been granted in the first place;
-all previous objections were ignored;
-have three storey houses a few feet from the sides of the garden and to also to the rear;
-has resulted in a loss of light to the garden including a greenhouse and out buildings which are used for growing plants;
-should visit neighbouring properties;
-object to any further development;
-believe some approval has been given as materials are on site;
-if application for whole development had been submitted as one may have been viewed differently;
-there are mature trees on the site, this must make it a conservation area;
-was previously leafy area and is now a concrete block;
-ground level and ridge of plot 3A will be higher than the house on the adjacent development leading to loss of privacy, light and amenity, understand the developer is going to amend this and trust these plans will be considered by Committee;
-amendments to housetypes and layout do not overcome objections.
Neighbours (1)Comment
-wall on the rear boundary of 4 and 6 Browning Road is a party wall owned by Browning Road properties;
-wall should not be altered or damaged in any way;
-if permission is granted ownership of the wall should be specified in deeds of new houses.
Relevant planning polices and guidance
Rugby Borough Core Strategy 2011
CS1CompliesDevelopment Strategy
CS10CompliesDeveloper Contributions
CS16CompliesSustainable Design
CS19CompliesAffordable Housing
Rugby Borough Local Plan 2006, Saved policies
GP2CompliesLandscaping
GP6CompliesSafeguarding development potential
E6CompliesBiodiversity
T5CompliesParking facilities
H11CompliesOpen space provision in residential developments in the urban area
LR1CompliesOpen Space Standards
Sustainable Design and Construction SPD, 2012
Planning Obligations SPD, 2012
National Planning Policy Framework, 2012
Assessment of proposals
A key issue to assess in relation to this application is whether the principle of the proposed development is acceptable in this location. The impact on matters including amenity of neighbours, visual amenity, highway safety and protected species must also be considered.
Policy CS1 sets out a hierarchy for development within the borough. This site is located within the Rugby Urban Area which is identified as the primary focus for meeting strategic growth targets. The principle of residential development in this location is therefore considered acceptable.
The impact on the character of the area and visual amenity must be assessed and this matter has also been referred to in objections. Crick Road was initially a predominantly linear development of residential properties with long rear gardens. However, recent developments have introduced cul-de-sacs and it is considered that the proposals reflect this.
The proposed development is a similar form to the existing development. An L-shaped property is proposed on plot 3A which forms an end stop within the site. The proposed dwellings relate to each other and it is considered that the form of proposed development creates a cohesive grouping and which is acceptable.
The proposed dwellings would be two storey, although some will have rooms within the roof space,and will be constructed of red brick and render with grey roof tiles. The proposals include gable features and canopies with curved headers and brick banding to the front elevation. These reflect the existing development and materials and features found on other properties in the area, the design of the properties is considered acceptable.
Therefore, the impact of the proposals on visual amenity and the character of the area is considered acceptable in accordance with policy CS16.
Saved policy GP6 states that development should not prejudice the development potential of other land from being realised. The site is immediately adjacent to other large gardens and it is considered possible that proposals for the development of these may be submitted in the future. The submitted layout would allow the road to be extended to accommodate development of adjacent land if this becomes available. The garage to plots 11 and 12 would have to be removed if land to the west were to be accessed though this site, however if the development of this adjacent land were proposed alternative parking could be provided. The proposals therefore comply with saved policy GP6.
As the application involves the development of rear gardens it will result in the loss of landscaping and trees and this has been raised as an objection by local residents. The Council’s Tree Officer has commented on the application and has no objection to the proposals. A condition could be attached to any consent to ensure a suitable landscaping scheme is provided and subject to this condition it is considered the proposals comply with saved policy GP2.
Objectors have stated that the proposals would have an adverse impact on neighbouring properties in terms of loss of privacy and light to homes and gardens.
The dwellings proposed on plots 3A, 13, 14 and 15 have a single storey projection to the rear. The distance from upper floor windows to the boundaries of neighbouring gardens ranges from around 9.5m to around 10m. This will impact on the level of privacy in these rear gardens, however it is considered that this is not to such an extent to warrant a recommendation of refusal.
Ground floor windows will be between around 8m and around 10m from neighbouring gardens, as these are at ground level fences could be erected to ensure these do not impact on privacy.
Plots 9 and 11-14 include rooms within the roof space and rooflights on the rear roofslope which would face towards neighbouring properties. These are high level rooflights and the impact on the neighbouring properties is considered acceptable.
The rooms within the roofspace, and first floor rooms are served by windows in the side elevations. To prevent loss of privacy to the neighbouring gardens it is considered that a condition is required to ensure the side facing windowsin plot 12 which look towards the adjacent gardens, are obscure glazed and to prevent the creation of additional windows where these would impact on neighbouring properties.
Comments have been made that the proposals would impact on the privacy in the surrounding dwellings themselves. However, the properties would be over 30m from houses on Browning Road. Plot 10 is proposed closest to properties on Crick Road, however, this property is set at 90 degrees to these houses so there would be no direct overlooking of the dwellings themselves.
The side elevation of plot 10 would be around 21m from the rear elevation of number 23 Crick Road. This level of separation is considered acceptable and it is not considered there will be a significant loss of light to the neighbouring dwellings themselves.
The dwelling proposed on plot 3A will be immediately adjacent to a recently completed dwelling in an adjacent development. The projecting element of plot 3A will be adjacent to a single storey projecting element and garage in the adjacent property. Therefore the projection at plot 3A will not impact on this property in terms of light or enclosure.
Neighbours at the rear commented that the ground level and ridge height of plot 3A should reflect those in the neighbouring development to reduce the impact on neighbouring homes and gardens. Amended plans have been received which reduce the plot levels in this part of the site resulting in the development being better related to the adjacent house.
It is considered that the distance between the rear of the proposed dwellings and the surrounding gardens is sufficient to ensure these gardens are not adversely impacted in terms of loss of light. The side elevation of plot 12 is close to the adjacent garden. However, this is adjacent to the areas of garden furthest from the dwelling, which is unlikely to be as intensively used as the areas close to the dwelling itself, the impact on this garden is therefore considered acceptable.
Subject to the conditions detailed above it is considered, on balance, that the impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties is acceptable in accordance with policy CS16.
Policy CS16 also states that development should incorporate sustainable drainage systems and comply with the water conservation standards. Compliance with water conservation standards and a suitable drainage scheme can be secured by condition and this is considered acceptable in accordance with policy CS16.
The Highway Authority, Warwickshire County Council, initially objected to the application on the grounds that there was the potential for conflict with nearby junctions. They also raised concerns that a visitor space close to Crick Road could lead to vehicles reversing off the site, that there was potential for conflict between vehicles and pedestrians and that large vehicles would not be able to pass.
The applicants provided a highway report including data on vehicle movements in the area. In addition the plans were amended to omit the visitor space closest to Crick Road, to widen the access in places and provide a pedestrian footway. Warwickshire Highways have confirmed that these amended plans overcome their concerns and have no objection subject to conditions, including a requirement for a traffic calming feature where the access meets Crick Road and bollards within the highway to prevent parking on the grass verge. Subject to these conditions the impact on highway safety is therefore considered acceptable.
Warwickshire Highways also recommended that the Fire Service and the Council’s Refuse Collection Team be consulted on the application. This was done and the Fire Service have no objection subject to a condition. No comments were received from the Refuse Team, however the applicant has advised that if necessary a bin collection area will be provided, this can be controlled by condition.
The proposed dwellings will each have 3 or 4 car parking spaces and 2 visitor spaces are proposed on the access road. The Council’s car parking standards contained within the Planning Obligations SPD require 3 spaces for 4 bedroom properties in this location but do not contain a specific standard for 5 or 6 bedroom properties. It is considered that the proposal to provide each dwelling with 3 or 4 spaces is acceptable.